Before DEI, There Was DIL, And It’s Time For Both To Go

I’ve written many times about the fact that DEI is nothing more than a quota program. If anyone on the left were honest, they would admit that truth. Hiring or promoting people based on the color of their skin, their gender, or their sexual ideology is demeaning to the individual because they are being used as nothing more than a token.

The left wants to pretend that hiring without considering merit or experience is progressive when every rational person understands that it is not. True diversity is based on variance and disparity of thought. Equality in the job market cannot be gifted; it must be earned. How can anything be considered inclusive when qualified people are excluded?

DEI is a social disease. It is not a societal remedy and does not advance any particular demographic group or groups. DEI plagiarizes reality and punishes both those it draws in and those it pushes away. It is a radical leftist lose–lose proposition.

The DEI virus has morphed and separated from another different but equally virulent strain known as “Disparate Impact Liability” (DIL).

DIL: “is a legal theory that asserts differences in outcomes among races, sexes, or similar groups suggest unlawful discrimination, even in the absence of discriminatory intent or policies.”

Translation: A company can be accused of discrimination even if they have done nothing wrong.

In 1971, the Supreme Court ruled in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. that employers cannot use hiring requirements to unintentionally exclude certain groups, even if there is no discriminatory intent involved. This decision established that discrimination does not necessarily require an intent to discriminate.

Employers may still appear bigoted, sexist, and racist if their hiring practices, despite good intentions, adversely affect certain groups.

For example, an employer looking to upgrade a position may require a college degree for a job that previously didn't require it can disproportionately affect minorities and women who may have less access to higher education, even if this requirement isn't intended to be discriminatory.

In addition to his executive order concerning DEI, President Trump signed another executive order on Wednesday to end disparate impact liability in “various contexts to ensure equal treatment under the law.”

According to Trump’s executive order:

“The theory violates the Constitution’s guarantee of equal treatment for all by requiring race-oriented policies and practices to rebalance outcomes along racial lines.”

“The Order revokes presidential actions that approved of disparate-impact liability and sets in motion broader reform. It directs all agencies to deprioritize enforcement of statutes and regulations that include disparate-impact liability.”

The order also “instructs the Attorney General to repeal or amend all Title VI (racial nondiscrimination) regulations that contemplate disparate-impact liability.”

In addition, the document:

“Directs the administration to assess all pending investigations, lawsuits, and consent judgments that rely on a theory of disparate-impact liability and take appropriate action.”

Disparate Impact, Liability (DIL), and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) are illusions created by Democrats and the radical left to placate those who complain about societal issues. Like many leftist ideas, they serve as a distraction that fosters division and promotes hatred and distrust among the population.

Trump is working to level the playing field by revealing the truth and correcting injustices that the left has concealed under a facade of deceit.

Milt spent thirty years as a sales and operations manager for an international manufacturing company. He is also a four-time published author on a variety of subjects. Now, he spends most of his time researching and writing about conservative politics and liberal folly.